#2560 - David Grusch

David Grusch said the U.S. government recovered intact or partly intact craft and anomalous intelligence piloting them, and that some material is being reverse-engineered. He testified to Congress about these claims but said he never had full access to the program holding the most detailed information. He described national-security technologies as arising mostly through inspiration from recovered material, while allowing that direct copying may have occurred. He does not know the craft’s origins; extraterrestrial, ultra-terrestrial and other explanations remain possibilities, not conclusions he can verify.

Grusch joined the UAP task force in 2019 after 15 years as an intelligence and Air Force officer, and became the NRO representative to the Navy task force. He said he expected to investigate possible reporting failures and believed he would be cleared into any U.S. program he identified. After testifying, Representative Burleson hired him as a congressional professional staff member. Grusch said he held classified briefings for members and worked with the Department of Justice on an ongoing investigation, but could not discuss details. He alleged that federal-agency officers used national-security programs to conceal child trafficking and other illegal activity that funded cutouts; he distinguished this alleged criminal enterprise from people working patriotically on UAP programs.

Grusch said he was administratively targeted in October 2020 with fabricated personal-conduct allegations, but retained his top-secret clearance and was hired by NGA as a 15 in late 2021. He reported a threat in early 2022 referring to his wife and home, though he does not know who sent it or why. He suspected monitoring of his classified computer and encrypted notes but could not confirm it. At an off-books Senate Intelligence Committee meeting, he said staff told him named individuals wanted to kill him; he believes the possibility was considered and later stopped. He said reports of people being tracked and the danger faced by sources contributed to his decision to go public.

Grusch argued that secrecy has enabled waived programs and weak congressional oversight, while sole-source contracts gave contractors exclusive research access before they sold resulting work back to the government. He said a November 2004 disclosure-planning meeting weighed the risks and, in his understanding, favored secrecy primarily because of potential federal-contracting fraud and liability. He warned that the arrangement could create legal challenges, groupthink, brain drain and harm to the defense industrial base. He supports use immunity for specific testimony, excluding unrelated crimes, and a Truth and Reconciliation Commission-style process alongside judicial handling of crimes. He said the UAP Disclosure Act of 2023 failed to pass.

Grusch said the disclosure question extends beyond displaying stored objects: it involves human third parties, national-security technology, foreign governments, allies and adversaries, and possible theological implications. He said Trump ordered the government to release what it knows and predicted disclosure before Trump’s term ends, while recognizing that the president must decide how to proceed. Grusch wants disclosure as soon as possible and before a future administration could reverse the directive; he would advise releasing information at least six months before the election. He expects shock and outrage but thinks disclosure could also unite people. He said gradual disclosure had been considered in prior assessments, but he does not know the current plan.

Some of Grusch’s most striking accounts are secondhand. He said he saw distant video of three or four human-looking bodies at a crash-retrieval scene, with pale bluish-white or gray skin, but did not see them in person and could not assess details clearly. He said biological samples had been compared genomically, but he does not know the results; he regrets not obtaining the assessment reports. He relayed accounts of different kinds of beings and apparent conflict, but stressed that he was not an expert and lacked direct access to the relevant program. He urged release of evidence for independent examination, saying video alone would not persuade without physical evidence and verification.

Grusch also described possible national-security and research implications without presenting them as established explanations. He said a 1952 recording described objects near nuclear sites and cited historical assessments of government concern, while acknowledging uncertainty about what the records prove. He considered artificial superintelligence a possible route to discovery if it detects inconsistencies across historical, genomic, medical or sensing data, but said he knows of no imminent AI-driven disclosure and warned that such systems could expose classified U.S. technology. He said he has no personal UAP experience, does not know why visitors have not made overt contact, and cannot determine their objectives or whether their behavior is benevolent or hostile.